In my view, protocols which you guys' presented is full of your own preference, prejudice and non-expert. it also shows incompleteness of IJS which is if judges try to manipulate, they can do this. That's the reason why judges have to be fair. I guess you guys try to support your favorite skaters under favor of judge's unfairness.
DIY: Judging
- Thread starter AC96
- Start date
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2011
kwanatic said:
To say that beforehand, I'm not trying to be attack-y or anything about this. The majority of what I wrote since the ladies LP was in the intention to calm the witch hunt, and is just secondarely about what I really thought about the scoring myself. IMO, it's just not a good argument to say 'but Yuna was always scored that way'. That shouldn't have anything to do with how the scores are handed out here, and it especially is not a justification for claiming these scores are wrong or right. If I remember correctly, even Tony Wheeler had Adelina above Yuna in the LP, even if it was by less then a point. And quite a few people I saw scoring these LPs had Adelina pretty close to Yuna in scores. Now if you factor in that there always is a little subjectivity, I don't think it's as blatantly absurd or wrong as a lot of people claim it is that Adelina came out ahead of Yuna in the LP (though the 5 point gap was definitly bogus and way too high).
Why is it acceptable if Yuna is beating Caro based on reputation, but it's a 100% disgrace if Adelina is beating Yuna due to home town boost? (I'm not argueing with the overall russian inflatation, I'm argueing with the extrem outcry specifically aimed at the ladies event)
bellamie said:
And how would your scores look then?
What exactly in my scoring displays preference, prejudice, and non-expert?
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
- Country
-
1. MAO ASADA
3A +.5 / commendable clean jump, although barely rotated and low free foot
3F+3Lo +1 / very fluid and clean combination, didn't deserve < call
3Lz -1.5 / an obvious flutz
CCoSp4 +1.5 / very good for the most part, the last position could definitely be better
FCSp3 -1 / the upside down position is too sloppy to be worth a level feature, travels quite a bit, the change of edge could be better
2A+3T< +1 / the underrotation call is fair here but both jumps are cleanly landed, the double axel is very strong
3S +.5 / the rotation could be better and there isn't good flow on the landing, but a well-timed jump
3F+2Lo+2Lo +1 / solid throughout
3Lo +1.5 / good spring, perfect rotation, good flow
FCCoSp4 0 / rather weak positions on the first half of the spin, none of the positions have timing with the music
StSq4 +2 / excellent and very difficult, but could have been a little faster and the hops could have had more pop
ChSq1 +2 / very nice, not astounding
Skating Skills - 8.75 / Very good blade control, could have had more speed and depth of edge
Transitions - 8.25 / None of her inbetweens are special, but she does have a pretty qood amount of them
Performance - 8.5 / It wasn't as alive as it could have been, but confident and well-delivered
Choreography - 7.5 / Not very imaginative choreography at all
Interpretation - 7.75 / The spins are not good with the music for the most part and nothing here is brilliant with the music, but she does have some nice moments and the last part of the program has stronger character
73.89 + 65.2 = 139.09
2. YU-NA KIM
3Lz+3T +2 / Excellent throughout.
3F +2 / Very strong.
3S+2T +1.5 / Good lift in this jump and dance steps beforehand.
FCCoSp4 +1 / Well done, but not spectacular
StSq4 +2 / Very well done
3Lz +1.5 / Tiny little imperfection on the landing, but a big jump and held solidly with an extended free leg.
2A+2T+2Lo +1
3S +1
LSp3 0 / Perfunctory.
ChSq1 +1.5 / The first part of it is underwhelming, and the last part could be more flavorful, but the mid section is excellent
2A +1.5 / Very well done late in the program.
CCoSp4 +.5 / Pretty well controlled throughout, but none of the positions are great, it doesn't hit the music, and it could be faster
Skating Skills - 9.25 / Very good speed, edges, and control.
Transitions - 8.0 / There's no question that the program is light on these, but she did have good dance steps in between elements during the first part of the program and her ina bauer into the 2Axel. Her excellent flow out of her jumps helps this score.
Performance - 8.75 / Not her most animated performance but she definitely gave herself moments throughout the program to really express. She executes these moments better than any of the other competitors.
Choreography - 8.5 / The movement presents a clear, cohesive idea throughout most of the program. There could have been more detail and a better choice of movements in the second half of the program, but it was the best package of the competition.
Interpretation - 8.5 / There's both a languidity and a sharpness that is conveyed throughout most of the program. There could have been more depth and, aside from the movements at the very end, the climax of the program (the final spin in particular) could been been interpreted better.
68.19 + 68.8 = 136.99
3. ADELINA SOTNIKOVA
3Lz+3T< +1.5 / She has a bit of a flutz, but the jump was GIGANTIC and both landings are clean (although the second jump was underrotated).
3F +2 / Difficult entrance and huge jump, although there could be more running edge on the landing.
3Lo +2 / Another HUGE jump, perfectly clean and rotated.
FCSp4 +2.5 / Good entrance, speed, centering, positions, and even timing with the music.
2A+3T +2 / HUGE and clean; ideally she wouldn't lean forward quite as much during the setup for the second jump.
3F+2T+2Lo -2 / Very messy at the end.
3S +1.5 / Big.
2A +1 / Solid jump, nothing amazing.
LSp4 +1.5 / Her sideways position is weak but overall well-done.
StSq4 0 / She does the moves but there isn't great speed or fluidity or any particular timing with the music. Several of the edges are sloppy.
ChSq1 +1.5 / Again, there's no particular timing with these moves to the music. Her first spiral position is spectacular, though.
CCoSp4 +1.5 / The change of foot could be better, sit spin positions could better, could have a little more speed...but still very good overall.
Skating Skills - 8.5 / Good speed, pretty good depth of edge, could have more control.
Transitions - 8.5 / Difficult entrance into the first flip (albeit slightly awkward in execution) and a good amount of inbetweens in the program, but nothing astounding.
Performance - 8.75 / Great energy and projection, although she does start to get noticeably tired and have a little gap in the performance during the last two jumping passes.
Choreography - 8.0 / Some interesting arm movements and positions, although as a whole it could definitely be more cohesive and have more detail.
Interpretation - 8.0 / A mixed bag. She definitely matches the exuberant quality of the music and I also thought she did well with the more introspective slower sections, plus most of her jumps even work well with the music, but her step sequences really have nothing to do with the music and some of her inbetweens don't really have anything to do with the music either.
69.38 + 66.8 = 136.18
4. CAROLINA KOSTNER
3Lz +1.5 / very big, good exit, could have had less setup time and a higher free foot on landing
2A+3T +1.5 / very clean, could be bigger
3F +2 / the jump itself is perfect
FCCoSp4 +.5 / well executed change of foot and broken leg position, but the final position loses speed and is a bit weak
FCSp4 +1 / solid
3Lo -.5 / good height, but tilted and an inside edge landing
3T+2T 0
3S +1
3S+2T+2T 0 / loses all flow at the end
StSq4 +2 / very good, not the best
ChSq1 +1 / she really doesn't do anything special here, it's fine
CCoSp4 0 / travels during the first half and sloppy at the end of the illusion spin portion
Skating Skills - 9.0 / Excellent edges, very good control...could be faster
Transitions - 7.5 / Some of the jump entrances were too telegraphed and there isn't anything particularly difficult going on inbetween the elements. This program used to have a very good transition directly out of the 2Axel, but she took it out after putting the 2Axel+3Toe combo in that spot.
Performance - 8.25 / For me she was a bit tight throughout the whole performance. It could have been much more free.
Choreography - 8.0 / The program was watered down from what has been in the past. Because Carolina was not completely throwing herself into the performance either, parts of the choreography are not quite as extended and finished as they could be.
Interpretation - 8.25 / I have a big problem with her ending pose here (this is Bolero, not a cabaret) and her watered down choreography detracted from how well the music was being reflected. Still, the movement is mostly in good character with the music.
66.15 + 65.6 = 131.75
5. GRACIE GOLD
3Lutz+3Toe +1.5 / Very solid, could be bigger.
2Axel+3Toe +1.5 / Again very solid, but could be bigger.
3Loop +1.5 / The same story.
CoSp4 +1.5 / Very good speed, the sit spin position could be better.
StSq3 +1 / Well controlled throughout, but lacks rhythm.
3Flip -3 and fall deduction
3Lutz +1.5 / Well done.
3Sal+2Toe+2Toe 0 / The toeloops could have more spring, barely any flow at the end.
CCoSp4 +1.5 / Well done, but nothing spectacular about it.
ChSq1 +1 / It's fine, nothing special.
2Axel +1 / Solid.
LSp4 +2 / Very good.
Skating Skills - 8.25 / Very good speed throughout, solid ability
Transitions - 8.25 / A bit lacking in the first half of the program, but has some difficult jump entrances later in the program.
Performance - 7.75 / She was very competent and polished, but superficial. The facial expressions were rather pasted-on and they came and went. She didn't give herself to the audience.
Choreography - 7.25 / Totally generic "pretty" stuff here (and the turning hop at the end makes no sense).
Interpretation - 7.0 / Again, superficial. She rarely seems to be truly with the music, but rather is just going through the planned moves. Some of those planned moves don't do much with the music to begin with.
66.04 + 61.6 = 127.64
6. ASHLEY WAGNER
3Flip+3Toe< -1 / Bit of a two-foot on the second jump.
2Axel 0 / Nothing special.
3Sal +.5 / Good pop, but a little wild both on takeoff and landing.
FSp3 +1 / Didn't hold the last position long enough for level credit, but well done.
LSp4 +1 / Well controlled throughout, could be faster and more stretch on positions (and better choice of movement with music on the first part).
3Lo+2A +2 / Difficult entry, good height and control
3Lz -.5 / A bit of an edge problem, but great height
3Lo +1 / Solid
StSq3 +1.5 / Could have better edges and speed on the turns, but well delivered.
3Flip+2Toe+2Toe -1 / Bit of a two-foot on the first jump.
ChSq1 +1.5 / Good arms, the turning steps were good with the music, could have transitioned between the different moves quicker and had more extension on the spiral
CCoSp4 +1 / Solid, would have been better if the last position was held out longer
Skating Skills - 8.0 / Good throughout for the most part, but not great in any particular area
Transitions - 8.0 / A fair amount of inbetweens, could definitely have more.
Performance - 8.5 / A bit too reserved during the first couple jump entries but she attacked this performance for the most part.
Choreography - 8.0 / Cohesive and flavorful movement throughout. Nothing truly special, but a pretty good package.
Interpretation - 8.0 / Could have more depth and inspired moments, but she feels the music and relates the general momentum of it quite well.
62.04 + 64.8 = 126.84
7. JULIA LIPSNITSKAYA
3Lutz+3Toe +.5 / Could have a better lutz edge and the landings of both jumps were hard, but she does get GREAT spring on the toeloop.
2Axel+3Toe+2Toe +.5 / Not a good double axel and a little awkward at the end, but again a very good triple toe.
FCSp4 +2 / Very good.
StSq3 +2 / Very good flow throughout for the most part and very difficult for a Level 3.
3Flip +1 / Could definitely be bigger, but well delivered.
2Axel +1 / Not much height but good distance and flow.
3Loop< -2 / Step out.
3Sal -3 and fall deduction
3Lutz+2Toe -.5 / Lutz edge could be better.
LSp4 +2 / Very good, although could be even faster.
ChSp1 +2 / Excellent positions, I wish the spiral was held out even longer though.
CCoSp4 +3 / Extraordinary.
Skating Skills - 8.25 / Good speed throughout without many crossovers, good control outside of the jump landings.
Transitions - 8.25 / Has transitions into everything, although the jump landings hurt this mark.
Performance - 7.75 / The performance was somewhat detached. Good polish but not her most alive.
Choreography - 7.75 / Interesting movements throughout, could be a little more distinct and the mistakes don't help.
Interpretation 7.5 / Her timing was off throughout much of the performance. As such, the character of the music wasn't able to be drawn out nearly as well as she normally could.
62.57 + 63.2 = 125.77
8. POLINA EDMUNDS
3Lutz+3Toe +1 / Solid, could be bigger and a little more around on the second part.
3Flip+half loop+3Sal +1.5 / Very good lift on both triples, could have more flow getting into the combination.
CCoSp3 +1 / Ridiculous that this was called as a Level 1. I'm assuming they decided that she didn't hold either of the sit spin positions long enough, but the second one is fine to me. As for the quality here, she could definitely transition between positions better, but it was a pretty well controlled and very difficult spin.
2Axel +1 / Solid, could work on getting more height and distance.
FSSp4 +.5 / Good entrance, pretty good speed and control, the positions are rather ugly and the exit could be better
StSq3 +.5 / Good control, could be faster and have more expression, timing, and edging.
3Flip< -3 and fall deduction
3Lutz +1 / Solid.
ChSq1 +2 / Lovely spirals, wonderfully timed to the music. The back mini-split could be better.
3Loop+2Toe 0 / Both landings could be more steady, could have more pop on the second jump.
2Axel 0 / Perfunctory.
LSp4 +2.5 / Excellent and extremely difficult.
Skating Skills - 8.0 / Good control and edges, could be faster.
Transitions - 7.5 / Has a good amount of inbetweens, needs to be less tentative going into the double axels and some of the other jumps in general.
Performance - 7.5 / Has wonderful arms. Should work on projecting more.
Choreography - 7.5 / Some very nice movements throughout and a very purposeful construction, although the last jumps of the program feel out of place and the footwork sequence is forgettable.
Interpretation - 7.5 / Was able to translate the delicate music very well in parts of the program. Some of the spins and footwork detracted from the interpretation, though, and there were a few random moves that didn't have much to do with the music.
62.19 + 60.8 = 122.99
3A +.5 / commendable clean jump, although barely rotated and low free foot
3F+3Lo +1 / very fluid and clean combination, didn't deserve < call
3Lz -1.5 / an obvious flutz
CCoSp4 +1.5 / very good for the most part, the last position could definitely be better
FCSp3 -1 / the upside down position is too sloppy to be worth a level feature, travels quite a bit, the change of edge could be better
2A+3T< +1 / the underrotation call is fair here but both jumps are cleanly landed, the double axel is very strong
3S +.5 / the rotation could be better and there isn't good flow on the landing, but a well-timed jump
3F+2Lo+2Lo +1 / solid throughout
3Lo +1.5 / good spring, perfect rotation, good flow
FCCoSp4 0 / rather weak positions on the first half of the spin, none of the positions have timing with the music
StSq4 +2 / excellent and very difficult, but could have been a little faster and the hops could have had more pop
ChSq1 +2 / very nice, not astounding
Skating Skills - 8.75 / Very good blade control, could have had more speed and depth of edge
Transitions - 8.25 / None of her inbetweens are special, but she does have a pretty qood amount of them
Performance - 8.5 / It wasn't as alive as it could have been, but confident and well-delivered
Choreography - 7.5 / Not very imaginative choreography at all
Interpretation - 7.75 / The spins are not good with the music for the most part and nothing here is brilliant with the music, but she does have some nice moments and the last part of the program has stronger character
73.89 + 65.2 = 139.09
2. YU-NA KIM
3Lz+3T +2 / Excellent throughout.
3F +2 / Very strong.
3S+2T +1.5 / Good lift in this jump and dance steps beforehand.
FCCoSp4 +1 / Well done, but not spectacular
StSq4 +2 / Very well done
3Lz +1.5 / Tiny little imperfection on the landing, but a big jump and held solidly with an extended free leg.
2A+2T+2Lo +1
3S +1
LSp3 0 / Perfunctory.
ChSq1 +1.5 / The first part of it is underwhelming, and the last part could be more flavorful, but the mid section is excellent
2A +1.5 / Very well done late in the program.
CCoSp4 +.5 / Pretty well controlled throughout, but none of the positions are great, it doesn't hit the music, and it could be faster
Skating Skills - 9.25 / Very good speed, edges, and control.
Transitions - 8.0 / There's no question that the program is light on these, but she did have good dance steps in between elements during the first part of the program and her ina bauer into the 2Axel. Her excellent flow out of her jumps helps this score.
Performance - 8.75 / Not her most animated performance but she definitely gave herself moments throughout the program to really express. She executes these moments better than any of the other competitors.
Choreography - 8.5 / The movement presents a clear, cohesive idea throughout most of the program. There could have been more detail and a better choice of movements in the second half of the program, but it was the best package of the competition.
Interpretation - 8.5 / There's both a languidity and a sharpness that is conveyed throughout most of the program. There could have been more depth and, aside from the movements at the very end, the climax of the program (the final spin in particular) could been been interpreted better.
68.19 + 68.8 = 136.99
3. ADELINA SOTNIKOVA
3Lz+3T< +1.5 / She has a bit of a flutz, but the jump was GIGANTIC and both landings are clean (although the second jump was underrotated).
3F +2 / Difficult entrance and huge jump, although there could be more running edge on the landing.
3Lo +2 / Another HUGE jump, perfectly clean and rotated.
FCSp4 +2.5 / Good entrance, speed, centering, positions, and even timing with the music.
2A+3T +2 / HUGE and clean; ideally she wouldn't lean forward quite as much during the setup for the second jump.
3F+2T+2Lo -2 / Very messy at the end.
3S +1.5 / Big.
2A +1 / Solid jump, nothing amazing.
LSp4 +1.5 / Her sideways position is weak but overall well-done.
StSq4 0 / She does the moves but there isn't great speed or fluidity or any particular timing with the music. Several of the edges are sloppy.
ChSq1 +1.5 / Again, there's no particular timing with these moves to the music. Her first spiral position is spectacular, though.
CCoSp4 +1.5 / The change of foot could be better, sit spin positions could better, could have a little more speed...but still very good overall.
Skating Skills - 8.5 / Good speed, pretty good depth of edge, could have more control.
Transitions - 8.5 / Difficult entrance into the first flip (albeit slightly awkward in execution) and a good amount of inbetweens in the program, but nothing astounding.
Performance - 8.75 / Great energy and projection, although she does start to get noticeably tired and have a little gap in the performance during the last two jumping passes.
Choreography - 8.0 / Some interesting arm movements and positions, although as a whole it could definitely be more cohesive and have more detail.
Interpretation - 8.0 / A mixed bag. She definitely matches the exuberant quality of the music and I also thought she did well with the more introspective slower sections, plus most of her jumps even work well with the music, but her step sequences really have nothing to do with the music and some of her inbetweens don't really have anything to do with the music either.
69.38 + 66.8 = 136.18
4. CAROLINA KOSTNER
3Lz +1.5 / very big, good exit, could have had less setup time and a higher free foot on landing
2A+3T +1.5 / very clean, could be bigger
3F +2 / the jump itself is perfect
FCCoSp4 +.5 / well executed change of foot and broken leg position, but the final position loses speed and is a bit weak
FCSp4 +1 / solid
3Lo -.5 / good height, but tilted and an inside edge landing
3T+2T 0
3S +1
3S+2T+2T 0 / loses all flow at the end
StSq4 +2 / very good, not the best
ChSq1 +1 / she really doesn't do anything special here, it's fine
CCoSp4 0 / travels during the first half and sloppy at the end of the illusion spin portion
Skating Skills - 9.0 / Excellent edges, very good control...could be faster
Transitions - 7.5 / Some of the jump entrances were too telegraphed and there isn't anything particularly difficult going on inbetween the elements. This program used to have a very good transition directly out of the 2Axel, but she took it out after putting the 2Axel+3Toe combo in that spot.
Performance - 8.25 / For me she was a bit tight throughout the whole performance. It could have been much more free.
Choreography - 8.0 / The program was watered down from what has been in the past. Because Carolina was not completely throwing herself into the performance either, parts of the choreography are not quite as extended and finished as they could be.
Interpretation - 8.25 / I have a big problem with her ending pose here (this is Bolero, not a cabaret) and her watered down choreography detracted from how well the music was being reflected. Still, the movement is mostly in good character with the music.
66.15 + 65.6 = 131.75
5. GRACIE GOLD
3Lutz+3Toe +1.5 / Very solid, could be bigger.
2Axel+3Toe +1.5 / Again very solid, but could be bigger.
3Loop +1.5 / The same story.
CoSp4 +1.5 / Very good speed, the sit spin position could be better.
StSq3 +1 / Well controlled throughout, but lacks rhythm.
3Flip -3 and fall deduction
3Lutz +1.5 / Well done.
3Sal+2Toe+2Toe 0 / The toeloops could have more spring, barely any flow at the end.
CCoSp4 +1.5 / Well done, but nothing spectacular about it.
ChSq1 +1 / It's fine, nothing special.
2Axel +1 / Solid.
LSp4 +2 / Very good.
Skating Skills - 8.25 / Very good speed throughout, solid ability
Transitions - 8.25 / A bit lacking in the first half of the program, but has some difficult jump entrances later in the program.
Performance - 7.75 / She was very competent and polished, but superficial. The facial expressions were rather pasted-on and they came and went. She didn't give herself to the audience.
Choreography - 7.25 / Totally generic "pretty" stuff here (and the turning hop at the end makes no sense).
Interpretation - 7.0 / Again, superficial. She rarely seems to be truly with the music, but rather is just going through the planned moves. Some of those planned moves don't do much with the music to begin with.
66.04 + 61.6 = 127.64
6. ASHLEY WAGNER
3Flip+3Toe< -1 / Bit of a two-foot on the second jump.
2Axel 0 / Nothing special.
3Sal +.5 / Good pop, but a little wild both on takeoff and landing.
FSp3 +1 / Didn't hold the last position long enough for level credit, but well done.
LSp4 +1 / Well controlled throughout, could be faster and more stretch on positions (and better choice of movement with music on the first part).
3Lo+2A +2 / Difficult entry, good height and control
3Lz -.5 / A bit of an edge problem, but great height
3Lo +1 / Solid
StSq3 +1.5 / Could have better edges and speed on the turns, but well delivered.
3Flip+2Toe+2Toe -1 / Bit of a two-foot on the first jump.
ChSq1 +1.5 / Good arms, the turning steps were good with the music, could have transitioned between the different moves quicker and had more extension on the spiral
CCoSp4 +1 / Solid, would have been better if the last position was held out longer
Skating Skills - 8.0 / Good throughout for the most part, but not great in any particular area
Transitions - 8.0 / A fair amount of inbetweens, could definitely have more.
Performance - 8.5 / A bit too reserved during the first couple jump entries but she attacked this performance for the most part.
Choreography - 8.0 / Cohesive and flavorful movement throughout. Nothing truly special, but a pretty good package.
Interpretation - 8.0 / Could have more depth and inspired moments, but she feels the music and relates the general momentum of it quite well.
62.04 + 64.8 = 126.84
7. JULIA LIPSNITSKAYA
3Lutz+3Toe +.5 / Could have a better lutz edge and the landings of both jumps were hard, but she does get GREAT spring on the toeloop.
2Axel+3Toe+2Toe +.5 / Not a good double axel and a little awkward at the end, but again a very good triple toe.
FCSp4 +2 / Very good.
StSq3 +2 / Very good flow throughout for the most part and very difficult for a Level 3.
3Flip +1 / Could definitely be bigger, but well delivered.
2Axel +1 / Not much height but good distance and flow.
3Loop< -2 / Step out.
3Sal -3 and fall deduction
3Lutz+2Toe -.5 / Lutz edge could be better.
LSp4 +2 / Very good, although could be even faster.
ChSp1 +2 / Excellent positions, I wish the spiral was held out even longer though.
CCoSp4 +3 / Extraordinary.
Skating Skills - 8.25 / Good speed throughout without many crossovers, good control outside of the jump landings.
Transitions - 8.25 / Has transitions into everything, although the jump landings hurt this mark.
Performance - 7.75 / The performance was somewhat detached. Good polish but not her most alive.
Choreography - 7.75 / Interesting movements throughout, could be a little more distinct and the mistakes don't help.
Interpretation 7.5 / Her timing was off throughout much of the performance. As such, the character of the music wasn't able to be drawn out nearly as well as she normally could.
62.57 + 63.2 = 125.77
8. POLINA EDMUNDS
3Lutz+3Toe +1 / Solid, could be bigger and a little more around on the second part.
3Flip+half loop+3Sal +1.5 / Very good lift on both triples, could have more flow getting into the combination.
CCoSp3 +1 / Ridiculous that this was called as a Level 1. I'm assuming they decided that she didn't hold either of the sit spin positions long enough, but the second one is fine to me. As for the quality here, she could definitely transition between positions better, but it was a pretty well controlled and very difficult spin.
2Axel +1 / Solid, could work on getting more height and distance.
FSSp4 +.5 / Good entrance, pretty good speed and control, the positions are rather ugly and the exit could be better
StSq3 +.5 / Good control, could be faster and have more expression, timing, and edging.
3Flip< -3 and fall deduction
3Lutz +1 / Solid.
ChSq1 +2 / Lovely spirals, wonderfully timed to the music. The back mini-split could be better.
3Loop+2Toe 0 / Both landings could be more steady, could have more pop on the second jump.
2Axel 0 / Perfunctory.
LSp4 +2.5 / Excellent and extremely difficult.
Skating Skills - 8.0 / Good control and edges, could be faster.
Transitions - 7.5 / Has a good amount of inbetweens, needs to be less tentative going into the double axels and some of the other jumps in general.
Performance - 7.5 / Has wonderful arms. Should work on projecting more.
Choreography - 7.5 / Some very nice movements throughout and a very purposeful construction, although the last jumps of the program feel out of place and the footwork sequence is forgettable.
Interpretation - 7.5 / Was able to translate the delicate music very well in parts of the program. Some of the spins and footwork detracted from the interpretation, though, and there were a few random moves that didn't have much to do with the music.
62.19 + 60.8 = 122.99
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Country
-
^I wish the protocols had explanations like that. We really should expect any ISU judge to be able to explain their marks within a few days of the scores being released and hold them accountable. Although I may not agree on all scores I can certainly see your viewpoint and take it as constructive. I think the skaters would themselves improve the overall sport with clear direction like this. 
^I wish the protocols had explanations like that. We really should expect any ISU judge to be able to explain their marks within a few days of the scores being released and hold them accountable. Although I may not agree on all scores I can certainly see your viewpoint and take it as constructive. I think the skaters would themselves improve the overall sport with clear direction like this.
Yes, it would be useful. IJS protocols give a lot more answers than 6.0 scores, but they still live plenty of open questions.
How could it be possible to give more answers efficiently?
Skaters register in advance to get a critique from at least one judge and one technical panel member after the event is over. These officials would know in advance they need to take extra-detailed written notes. It would be easier for the officials to talk to the skater directly (unless they don't share a common language), preferably face to face -- writing it out in sentences takes more time than saying the sentences out loud, and direct interaction would allow skaters to ask for further clarification. These kind of critiques do take place at pre-season events. Could/should time be built into big events to debrief the skaters afterward? But it would not be very feasible to have all skaters get such feedback from all officials on their panels.
The ISU develops and requires judges specialists to use a standardized shorthand. Similar to < and e, there could be symbols for all common errors and all common strengths and weaknesses that affect PCS and GOEs. That would allow anyone to read a judge's notes and know much more what they were thinking. But would it be feasible to get all these comments input into the computer so they could be printed out in protocols? And what about judges' thoughts that don't fit into the common, standardized reasons but are unique to specific programs?
The referee holds a post-event debrief with the judges followed by an explanatory open meeting/press conference. All judges would need to take detailed notes on all skaters. The meeting would focus on the medalists and other controversial decisions. Perhaps the host federation or major press outfits could also request focus on the home skaters regardless of placement. As they did under 6.0, judges would discuss their reasonings after the fact. The ref could then summarize the considerations that went into the medal decisions and present the summary publicly, without singling out individual judges.
How would politics and personalities affect judges' ability to speak freely in these debriefs and referees' ability to convey those thoughts accurately to the skaters/press/public?
As long as there's no gag order, judges could be free to clarify their own thoughts to the press afterward if they felt they were misrepresented.
If there's no anonymity as well, the press, and skater/coaches/federations, could contact judges directly to ask for clarifications.
I'm sure the ISU would worry that people who don't like the results would harass officials to get explanations, and that preventing such harassment is one reason for the tradition of secrecy. Can we trust the press to be professional about it?
- Joined
- Nov 30, 2007
Come on. Carolina telegraphed all her jumps, had no flow in and out of them, did no 3-3. She is tall, may look majestic, but she skated cautiously (and several of her jumps had sloppy landing).
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Country
-
Do you ever say anything positive?
- Joined
- May 19, 2011
It's acceptable b/c she's Yu-Na. It isn't fair, but that's the way it works. Because of who she is, she gets the higher marks even if she doesn't deserve them. Both Carolina and Yu-Na should not receive anything over 8.00 or 8.25 for transitions b/c both of them generate their speed from doing multiple crossovers in a row (Carolina does about 4, Yu-Na does 6). Compare that to Mao, Adelina or Julia and you see that there are a lot more steps and connecting moves between the crossovers...but the judges don't pay attention to that and they are scored lower.
Kaetlyn Osmond should have had the highest TR score in the SP. Her whole program is nothing but transitions into and out of every single element...yet her TR score was a 6.96 compared to Yu-Na's 8.61 and Carolina's 8.79.
It's not fair. Oftentimes the scores are more about the skater than the actual skating. Because Yu-Na is Yu-Na Kim (OGM, 2-time world champ, legend Yu-Na Kim) she outranks everyone and will get the boost in her scoring even if she doesn't really deserve it. Same thing goes for Carolina and (to a lesser extent) Mao...Mao is rarely scored on the same level with Yu-Na and Carolina despite the fact I think she is just as good if not better than them in some categories.
That's just the nature of scoring...:disapp:
I agree that Carolina telegraphs her jumps but the majority of them had excellent flow going in and coming out. Great height and coverage, gorgeous and tight air position and fully extended landings. She had a very nice 2A-3T and 7 triples total. She didn't skate all-out like Adelina did; she was more reserved, similar to Yu-Na BUT Carolina's FS generates a lot more energy at the end and she delivered that perfectly.
Give credit where it is due...
Really? I thought most of her jumps had nothing to do with the music. Adelina had energy but that doesn't equate to interpretation. I also think her choreography lacked the sophistication of the programs skated by the veteran skaters. Since execution is part of the PE mark, things such as posture, clarity of movement, and refinement of style should all be taken into consideration. In these aspects, I believe Mao and Carolina are clearly superior to Adelina. Their skating also has a certain level of depth that the younger skaters not have yet developed, which I believe should be reflected in PCS scores. I also feel it's a bit odd to note the superficiality in Gracie's programs and interpretation, when the same criticism can be applied to Adelina. I believe Adelina's team was going for the 'avant-garde' route in her choreography, yet she failed to truly bring out the concept. In the end, the whole performance appeared quite strange and there were parts that were honestly quite tacky (wave during the spiral).
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
- Country
-
The 2Axel+3Toe landings were perfect with the beats of the music, same with the 3Sal and solo 2Axel. The 3Lutz+3Toe was good with the music too.
However, she should have done the 3Flip+2Toe+2Loop in the first half of the program (trading places with the solo 3Flip), that would have suited the music better in both of those sections of the program.
Based on a few live reports I've read about the event, the difference between the quality of Adelina's performance and the three veteran skaters is even more apparent. And the audience, even some of the Russian fans, was very impressed by Mao's performance.
Very interesting analysis--you're a pretty tough grader, BOP! But I agree, generally. I watched Adelina's LP again--it's on the NBC website--and the real problem I have with the scoring was how big her margin was. I think Yuna was probably the rightful winner, but by a small margin, as your scores indicate. If Adelina is the deserving winner, as some think, she should have won by just a point or fraction of a point.
First, thanks to the OP, definitely one of the more interesting threads. Second, thanks to all who bothered to score these programs and post results. BOP, I almost always appreciate your posts, and I learned so much from your scoring on this thread. I admittedly have but a rudementary understanding of PCS despite reading this forum for four years, there are clearly things which I just don't see. I note a lot of other posters believed Carolina should be first or second in the FS, yet BOP has her fourth. You noticed, which others did not, that her transitions and choreography were not up to the standards, in this particular skate, of Kim, Asada, etc. I also saw some weaknesses in transitions and choreography, but only after watching her performance three or four times. I probably never would catch that the first time. I note the average score given by the judges for Carolina was 8.71 for transitions and 9.21 for choreography. Clearly, the judges didn't see the flaws either.
I still see PCS as too reputation based, once a skater establishes over the passage of time, strong skating skills, high scores for TR, PE, Ch and IN will inevitably follow, regardless of whether a particular performance merits such scores. Another poster, I think Ziggy, has noted on another thread that judges are so busy watching, analyzing, and scoreing GOE's for elements, they tend to overlook the detail needed to properly score PCS. He suggested a separate panel is needed to score PCS properly, and I think he is correct. But I can't see the ISU adding nine additional judges for PCS, and if a small number was chosen, it could be subjected easily to political manipulation.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2011
b-man said:
I had Carolina 2nd in the LP, 1st overall - and yet, I had her lowest in TR (actually, together with Yuna, I don't get why you think Caro was weak in this regard compared to her) and in the middle of the pack for CH. It's not a secret TR is by far Caros weakest area. But TR & CH are just 2 marks... I think she deserves to have more of an advantage in SS, and she deserves good marks in PE and IN.
Overall, moving someone up 0.25 points in a PCS category or not doesn't change all that much. I rather got the impression the difference is in how you score the GOE, because the range is usually bigger than that of the PCS.
Regarding SS, many prefer Carolina, many prefer Kim, some think they are pretty even. I note BOP gave Kim higher SS, Kim 9.25 to 9.0, and the actual judges : Kim 9.21 to Caro's 9.14, a negligible amount, but not the clear preference, or even a slight edge for Caro that you see.
As far as GOE, I note Kim got 13 +3's and 12.2 GOE points from the real judges, Caro 12 +3's, and 10.9 GOE points. BOP gave 3 +2's to Kim and 2 +2's to Caro. Neither the real judges nor BOP scored Caro higher than Kim in GOE.
I certainly agree Caro deserved high marks in PE and IN, her program was one of the most enjoyable for me, though BOP panned aspects of the performance.
Where both suffered was in base value. Among the first four in the FS, Mao's BV: 66.34, Sot: 61.4, caro: 58.45 and Kim 57.49.
As far as GOE, I note Kim got 13 +3's and 12.2 GOE points from the real judges, Caro 12 +3's, and 10.9 GOE points. BOP gave 3 +2's to Kim and 2 +2's to Caro. Neither the real judges nor BOP scored Caro higher than Kim in GOE.
I certainly agree Caro deserved high marks in PE and IN, her program was one of the most enjoyable for me, though BOP panned aspects of the performance.
Where both suffered was in base value. Among the first four in the FS, Mao's BV: 66.34, Sot: 61.4, caro: 58.45 and Kim 57.49.
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2008
- Country
-
Kostner can do more with her blades with Yu-Na, but this particular performance did not showcase her full abilities in that regard. Kostner was slower, so that automatically detracts considering there wasn't a large amount of inbetween movement going on that could slow her down.
Similar threads
